[OpenID] OpenID Chance II

Johannes Ernst jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us
Fri Feb 2 20:00:15 UTC 2007

Good observation. To make the point even more strongly: "Professor X,  
who claimed that battle was fought at Hastings in 1066, is indeed a  
professor because University Y says ..."

Where there are differences is in much narrower types of claim that  
Citizendium wants to chec and the ability to automate their checking.  
For example, it is not very hard technically to invoke a web service  
to a university to check whether somebody has attribute PhD set in  
some database, while it is rather hard to invoke a web service to the  
battle of Hastings...

On Feb 2, 2007, at 11:31, Bob Wyman wrote:

> It's interesting to see that Citizendium is interested in getting  
> verifiable "identity data" concerning its contributors. However,  
> I'm curious to know if anyone can suggest a fundamental difference  
> between the kind of "identity data" that they seek and the kind of  
> factual data that they will publish in Citizendium itself. What, if  
> anything, makes qualitative identity data "different" from claims  
> in any other realm?
> To claim that an individual does or does not hold the degree "Phd"  
> seems to me to be very much like claiming that a battle did or did  
> not happen at Hastings in 1066. (I assume that Citizendium will, in  
> fact, have recorded within it the claim that such a battle did  
> occur...) In both cases, a claim is made by some authority and the  
> strength of the claim will, I assume, be largely related to the  
> reputation of the authority. In both cases, however, the binding  
> between the claim and the claimant is independent of reputation.  
> The only difference between the first claim (re: Phd) and the  
> second (re: 1066) is that one is a claim about a person and the  
> other is not. However, it seems to me that the technology used to  
> make one claim does not differ from the technology needed to make  
> the second. Thus, it would be very odd, I think, if we ended up  
> with one method for making claims about people and another for  
> making claims about non-people... Citizendium should be able to  
> publish statements like: "Professor X claimed, on 1-Feb-2007, that  
> a battle was fought at Hastings in 1066." Then, just as people are  
> likely to say things like: "I know it is true since I read it at  
> Citizendium," other applications and other individuals should then  
> be able to bolster their own claims by referring to the claims  
> encoded on Citizendium. How is any of this different from  what we  
> need to maintain and assert claims about qualitative identity?
> bob wyman
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general

More information about the general mailing list